TeerAll I thought was ‘finally!’ Though I don’t see much of a future for this engine
You’d think differently, if you had a serious interest in aerospace systems and the overall intent of the program, which would allow you to grasp the magnitude of what the success of the current Kaveri itself represents.
Teerwith changing AD environment the low level CAS function has become much more dangerous. I think the time has come for CAS to be done from medium height using PGMs other than for attack helos. don’t mistake me, I’m a big fan of the frogfoot but I think that role doesn’t make too much sense now.
the LCA with PGMs will be a much better option. more so because of the cheap availability of DRDO’s new laser guidance kit.
Well, the Harrier would be equally vulnerable would it not?
What I meant was, dont use the Harrier for CAS but a dedicated fleet of relatively rugged Su-25 types. They’ll still be dependent on AFB, but then, I really doubt whether Harriers are a sustainable buy given how complex they are, and spares are going to be an issue.
TeerWhile I agree with ACM PV Naik that the IAF is now looking for 4th gen fighters, and should concentrate on acquiring those quickly, I actually believe that if the sale price is low, then those Harrier GR.9s are not a bad option and 3 squadrons plus the OCU aircraft could be bought to be based solely in the North East or the Andaman and Nicobar islands-basically for their ability to operate from austere forward bases. They have some solid ground strike capabilities built up over time and have been serving usefully in CAS roles in Afghanistan.
……
My long standing wish for ground strike is that India take over Su-25 production. They are really tough little birds and this one landed fine despite the damage.
http://redbannernorthernfleet.blogspot.com/2008/09/su-25-frogfoot-in-combat-over-georgia.html
http://www.strizhi.ru/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1219408809
Basically, raise the squadron cap from 42 to 55 and bulk up, using additional squadrons of cheaper Su-25s and LCA variants.
TeerThe level of stealth incorporated into an airplane can allow you to operate at several levels. Levels of operation for stealth airplanes are, in descending order (most stealthy to least stealthy):.
DJ Cross, is the F-35 LO suitable for even S-3XX series/LBand/S Band radars or primarily optimized for X band
TeerUSA can decide to provide Pakistan with F-35, India has no say on that decision, its a US defence policy matter.
As far as F-16 are concerned even with the platform on offer to India which is the evolution of the block-60 planes , they had to provide a detailed plan for transferring the required amount of technology and manufacturing to India.
The discussion is in reference to Col. Shukla (a defence journo) suggesting that India should scrap the current MMRCA contest and have a government to government negotiation/purchase of the F-35 (for the 126 numbers required), there are arguments for and against this opinion.
.
Reading through the comments on Shukla’s blog it boils down to whether the commenters think purchasing a key fighter, from the US is ok or not. But purely on the technology side of things, a lot of what he says does make sense.
The JSF does have some good capabilities, eg stealth.
The European counterpoint is that with their platforms are as effective with more varied load outs, and not aerodynamically compromised. And also, there is the delay factor.
Bill Sweetman has a good overview of the tradeoffs here:
Interestingly he made the presentation at Aero India 2009 in Bangalore.
I think the MMRCA has gone too far now to be cancelled and replaced by the JSF. As to whether Shukla is right or wrong, thats a whole new ballgame, since there are so many variables as mentioned previously, with arguments both in favor of and against it.
TeerIt has been spotted (“speculated” really) on relatively recent photos of MiG-29K/KUB/35 trials.
I have to go to work right now, when I get back I’ll scrape together the available information that I have.
Cheers,
TR1
TR1, thanks for the effort.
I remember the “different radome” on some MiG-35 prototype, and the speculation that it was lengthened but others disagreed and said it was the same as before. Are you referring to that? What’d be really interesting is if there is some text source mentioning it has the 1064 TRM radar.
TeerIndian Navy issued a request for information for F-35 earlier this year. Lockheed Martin provided the information as authorized by the US government. Google it.
DJCross, thanks, Lockheed seemed to have made presentations around both the B and C versions.
Are you aware of whether the IN is specifically interested in one variant?
TeerSeems to be doing better than limping, the larger sized (1064? element) Zhuk-A is flying.
Can you give a link or source for this? This is interesting.
TeerCool, so we just ignore the mods warning about keeping Jingoism out of it do we!?
:confused:
I made a factual, referenced post about the situation at hand re: the F-35, and why its no big deal, given the substantial development in US India ties, and the consequent impacts on the arms trade and even future developments in related sectors, nothing jingoistic there. It also addresses the Pak. objection factor, and why that reasoning is not credible. It does go against your beliefs, but it relies on facts, and you are free to disagree using a similar approach.
And leave it to the mods to do their job. I think they are well qualified to make their own choices. Please don’t attempt to speak for them or try to pass comments implying the same, merely because somebody posted an opinion which contradicts yours.
TeerF-35 is as much a game changer as any other weapon system on offer w.r.t Pakistan, the current F-16s being delivered to Pakistan have legacy avionics compared to the two contenders on MMRCA?
E-2D has been cleared for all the stages till now, just like the MMRCA, the deal depends on India being ready to buy it, and its not a revolutionary system.
The US would be glad to sell India the F-35. For all the bad press the program has got (sometimes unjustifiably), racking up a big customer would be a big win. Lockheed Martin has gone on record many times over, pitching the F-16IN as a logical “bridge” to the F-35, once production slots become available for possible sales to India.
Pakistan has little say on American decisions, India is now far ahead economically, and the US recognizes it, and has de-hypenated relations by treating India and Pak separately. India got a specially brokered nuclear deal, a far more strategic game changer than a few F-35s, and furthermore, many Indian firms/entities are being taken off the restricted list created in earlier times. Pakistan, despite all its complaints and how it too deserves something similar, did not receive the same.
Given the Indian economic growth, the strategic impetus to ties started during the Bush administration, the shared values in terms of pursuing the process of democracy et al., and the long term strategic aspects (counterweight to the PRC, the indian demographic trends for a high youth population which will enter the workstream), the JSF is but a tiny cog in the overall relationship.
In recent days, as far as arms are concerned, the US has pitched for Aegis sales to India, Patriot missile systems (PAC-2 GEM and PAC-3 have both been marketed) and many other systems. Boeing has tied up with India’s Tier1 defense PSU http://www.dancewithshadows.com/aviation/boeing-bel-sign-pact-to-set-up-analysis-and-experimentation-centre-in-india/
The offsets deals involve volumes which are staggering. The C-17 currently in negotiation for instance, is worth $5.8B, all options exercised. Under Indian offset criteria, around $1.7Billion to $2.7 Billion will be ordered back from Indian industry by Boeing. For the P-8I, Boeing has already had its tier1 suppliers sit down with Indian industry to partner for subsystems.
http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-44526720091207?sp=true%3b
Talk to any US exec, and the message is clear, they are willing to sell, provided India is willing to buy. It speaks volumes that the pressure to sign CISMOA and the other agreements is from the US side, to drive further sales and interoperability. The Indian forces on the other side, are not so hung up on specific communications links which are denied thanks to not signing the CISMOA as they can integrate their own datalinks and sets. For the P-8I, BEL supplied its own Link-11 set which is currently used by the Indian Navy.
What will be really interesting to watch, in the coming days, is the impact on the Indian manufacturing sector, thanks to the growing US India ties. The IT and engineering services sector is already well known whereas in manufacturing, thanks to both local and export demand, the automotive industry has grown substantially.
Thanks to the huge offsets programs, and India’s own programs, the new growth sector is Aerospace. This will in turn have a spin off effect on other sectors such as the Steel and Alloys industry, plus the overall relaxation in Indo-US ties means that the restrictions on industries such as electronics (in terms of process and equipment) which were previously the case may also end up being relaxed, leading to substantial growth in this segment.
Interesting days ahead, and the JSF is peanuts when compared to the big picture which has seen far more strategic agreements develop.
TeerHarriers now!, well IMO does not look to be the right option even for the Indian Navy,( I have to admit I like then , the photograph of a harrier firing it’s rockets in the Flaklands war still looks so live), but should IN get them now, I believe Navy had shown interest in these Harriers earlier , this didn’t look so favorable then , so why now?
How long would they serve?
There are only 8-10 odd Harriers left with the Navy. Acquiring new Harriers from the UK would allow the fleet to be split between strike and air intercept, which is not a bad thing, and allow for the IN to have 2 carrier capability for some time, even after the Gorshkov comes.
TeerFirst Muns, if you read this, sorry about the late response. Being clueless, I accidentally deleted your message, please resend if possible.
————-
Now, some really positive developments testifying to the rapid strides being made by DRDO & its local production partners in developing radar & surveillance technology.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/02/stories/2010110263930900.htm
Indigenous AWACS to be flight-tested by 2011
Five frontline laboratories of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) are working to develop the system which would be 85 per cent indigenous, Prahlada, Chief Controller, R & D (Aerospace and Services Interaction), DRDO, told The Hindu here.
While three of the systems would be integrated on board the Brazilian Embraer EMB 145 jet and delivered by 2014, the aircraft on which the remaining six AWACS would be mounted was yet to be decided. The DRDO received the sanction for developing the six AWACS costing Rs.10,000 crore, he added.
….
and
With the three services requiring several aerostats, the DRDO would be making two types of military aerostats — the first type to carry military payloads up to an altitude of 1,000 metres and the second up to a height of 5,000 metres.
Already a 1,000-metre aerostat was afloat and its functions were demonstrated to both the Army and Air Force, he added.
The report also mentions that the intended functions for the aerostats encompass surveillance, jamming, data gathering and communication relay and that the 1000 meter aerostat will have a radar coverage of 150 km, whereas that of the 5000 meter one would be 200-250 km.
This needs to be considered with the fact that the DRDO is developing various classes of radars LLTR, Medium Power radars – aka long range systems, and has even more advanced versions of the high power ABM systems in the pipeline. And DLRL (the electronics laboratory) has several high end EW systems either in delivery and with more in the pipeline. Current radar orders for DRDO & partners already substantial, and these newer systems will round out the portfolio.
This will have a huge spin off on both India’s import bill but also free up spending for procuring the most advanced force multipliers versus the essential items which make up the bulk of the requirements, but are fairly sophisticated in themselves and expensive. Sourcing these items locally has a huge strategic and economic advantage.
Consider that for Medium Power Radars, that the IAF has split its MPR order between Israel and India, and clearly, the long term requirement for more MPRs (as current systems age out) will be met inhouse. The same holds true for LLTRs (again order split between France and India) and LLLWRs.
TeerEven for land use there are applications against sea(land)-skimming missiles, in particular ALCMs.
You are not getting the point at all.
Over land, unless its flat terrain all the way etc, you are not going to see aircraft & missiles go below a certain level, and even there the Akash can strike. A few meters below that, and SR-SAMs can hit there as well. Both are part of the Indian acquisition/inventory.
Internalize this, speed & height of flight are in opposite directions as far as control systems are concerned.
Over sea, you can put a radar altimeter & a height lock loop algorithm to take into account the waves & different sea states and hence come up with very low heights. Hence all the talk of sea skimming missiles flying at 100 feet and even below.
Over land, you don’t have that benefit, there are wires, obstructions every place and the variance in terrain is mindboggling.
So cruise missiles use a combination of inertial nav, radalts and the truly sophisticated ones, using passive database derived navigation input, which correlates with mapped terrain. Given the margin for error is so low, they have a minimum height below which they dont go and are hence vulnerable to properly designed IADS, especially the subsonic ones. Tomahawks in ODS for instance are cited at flying a “few hundred feet” off the ground. A 100 feet is 30 meters. (Desert Storm, what the Navy did). As matter of fact, Missile Guidance texts quotes the height for a typical subsonic land attack cruise missile as 200 meters.
The success of these missiles is determined by the fact that radar horizon is low even at that height, and they are literally “on the target” before medium range ADS has the time to react. So its not that they are too low to shoot down, its that they are there before you knew they were, because your average medium ranged radar only picked them up at 40-50 km. The supersonic ones, of course are even more dangerous.
The solution to this of course, is to have layered detection using aerostats, AEW&C who are high, dont have radar horizon issues, and pick them up from afar and start shooting them down, and for the leakers have QRSAMs with fast reaction times & low minimum ranges. Subsonic missiles, the vast majority in the world, and the ones with India’s adversaries are all vulnerable.
Even so, the true low fliers are the helicopter pilots, who literally fly “on the deck”, ie a few meters above ground level (as low as 10 meters and even below!), though the speed is a fraction of that of combat aircraft and even subsonic missiles. But they in turn are very vulnerable to MANPADS and ground fire.
Teerok do not understand the issue here….
If your design target is 5500 Kgs and all your performance calculations are based on that weight but your aircraft actually makes it 6500kg you are over weight it does not matter if other aircraft weight the same as yours.
If the LCA structural weight increase is due to a lack of confidence in the design or stressing phase:
My goodness, you do go on and on …
Lets restate what Kramer said..
The LCA weight increase is due to multiple factors only two of which are unrealistic prior estimates with regards to weight estimates and second, conservatism in tolerances.
The other reasons are fairly straightforward, leading edge ASRs from the IAF several of which were and are unrealistic, and scope creep.
The LCA MK1 today has a HMS and HOBS missile, no other IAF aircraft has it. Contrary to your interpretation, what the article is saying is fairly obvious, that by incorporating such out of turn requests, the LCA is far more capable than originally planned in some respects, and while that has come with a weight gain, the advanced avionics and systems compensate when it comes to combat.
They incorporated it when even the Su-30 MKI has only got a HMCS integration and for FOC there is talk of a newer CCM! The LCA program is full of such change requests. Contrary to the EF and Rafale, the LCA is not being run as a commercial project with strict contractual safeguards and haggling over minutiae.
Another example is the integrated glass cockpit on the LCA, which only the much larger Su-30 MKI had, but the LCA has pretty much all the features & the overall integrated avionics suite is more advanced than on any other IAF aircraft, bar the MKI. They also include additions to the EW suite & a more capable radar set than originally planned, and a more diverse set of munitions. Again more weight in black boxes, in beefing up the structure along the way.
Obviously the weight was impacted. The other option is to drop all this kit, and achieve weight savings and for what? Stick to some definition made around 1987-88 when things were different?
Instead, they are going to stick with what they have and put a higher thrust engine for the MK2. Which makes absolute sense.
So does Kramers comparison to the Gripen. He is pointing out that the LCA’s form factor is slap bang in its class, and in fact is fairly credible.
If it was a 8T empty aircraft & gave the payload of a Gripen, then yeah, they messed up. But they did’nt. With all their tolerances, the airframe is fairly ok and if India had a track record of engine manufacture & development & could develop higher thrust variants to iteratively improve on a baseline, the LCA MK2 would have been no big deal.
You don’t seem to even understand what the LCA is. Its more than just a fighter or your favored sidetrack into composites jabs and one-liners, its about making an entire aerospace industry and that includes everything, from PLM software (yes, no kidding!) to avionics LRUs down to the HUD and even stuff like the detonating cord for the canopy!
Its India’s over arching effort to bridge the entire gap in aircraft design, manufacture and all the fillings that go into the shell, that developed over 2 decades.
Until you understand this, and stop nitpicking over what plie went over two times, you wont get what the design aims are and why they are so hard to pin down & why they kept changing as well. The IAF bears a fair share of burden in terms of scope creep, but if you were actually ever in Indian aerospace, especially the pvt industry, and saw the kind of work that has been done versus a decade back, then you’d realize the base that has been built thanks to the LCA.
Meanwhile, the IAF understands this. Which is why, thanks to the LCA, 150 aircraft have been upgraded entirely in India, and more and more LCA kit is being retrofitted to Indian warplanes. Its created an ecosystem by itself. The IAF has asked for DARE (DRDO), the LCA’s EW team to be part of the Su-30 MKI upgrade program so they can even work on the active ECM. The MiG-29s which the IAF are getting via Russian upgrade, will also now include LCA derived EW active jammers & avionics. The LCA tech., is already all over the Indian fleet. Heck, last I heard, even the Hawks were to get new Indian Mission Computers. Keep the context in mind, when you try & see what this project is, and why they have stressed on technology development, even if it was ambitious.
TeerWe need to be clear what the Akash is meant for, the Akash is not meant for a naval use, so why would it have to engage sea skimming targets. However, it did engage low flying targets at trials at Chandipore on Sea, showing that the system is capable.
For Naval use, we’ll be relying on the Barak-8/LRSAM & Barak-1. With a radar mounted high up, it should be able to pick up a sea skimmer, fairly far away.
But the Akash is basically meant for land use, where it can engage low flying targets, with both Raj & 3D CAR capable of detecting the same. We really should not be going to get into exact numbers, since this is a system that is going to be deployed operationally.
The bigger thing than the Akash is the creation of a national air grid, which is in the works.
Sign In
